Download Marketing approaches to pop up stores Explorations of social networks

MARKETING APPROACHES TO POP-UP STORES:
EXPLORATION OF SOCIAL NETWORKING
Dr Ruth Marciniak (for correspondence)
London Metropolitan University
Londonmet Business School
North Campus
Stapleton House
277-281 Holloway Road
London N7 8HN
UK
Email: [email protected]
Corinna Budnarowska
Bournemouth University
School of Services Management
Talbot Campus
Poole
Dorset
BH12 5BB
UK
Phone : 01202 965579
Email : [email protected]
Key words: social networking, entrepreneurial marketing, fashion retailing,
pop-up stores
Word count: 4,855
Abstract
Internet and mobile technologies are redefining how retailers promote themselves to consumers.
For instance, over recent years, the high street has witnessed the phenomenon of ‘pop up stores’, which
rely on social network sites (SNS) and text messaging to inform consumers of their presence. In essence,
they are retail stores that open up at empty retail locations for a temporary period of time and then
disappear. The purpose of this paper is to describe this trend in terms of which retailers are doing it, why,
where and how are they doing it? In addition, the paper is theoretically underpinned by an examination of
literature drawn from entrepreneurial marketing in order to explore how retailers have exploited internet
and mobile technologies in order to create marketing and branding opportunities. Finally, the paper offers
directions for future research.
MARKETING APPROACHES TO POP-UP STORES:
EXPLORATION OF SOCIAL NETWORKING
Abstract
Internet and mobile technologies are redefining how retailers promote themselves to consumers.
For instance, over recent years, the high street has witnessed the phenomenon of ‘pop-up stores’, which
rely on social network sites (SNS) and text messaging to inform consumers of their presence. In essence,
they are retail stores that open up at empty retail locations for a temporary period of time and then
disappear. The purpose of this paper is to describe this trend in terms of which retailers are doing it, why,
where and how are they doing it? In addition, the paper is theoretically underpinned by an examination of
literature drawn from entrepreneurial marketing in order to explore how retailers have exploited internet
and mobile technologies in order to create marketing and branding opportunities. Finally, the paper offers
directions for future research.
Keywords:
social networking, entrepreneurial marketing, fashion retailing,
pop-up stores
Introduction
Pop-up stores wherein retail brands take up temporary residence in empty retail
property spaces are not something new. Traditionally, it has been discount shops, for
example, one pound shops, who take advantage of empty retail units in order to off load
end of lines (Barr 2008). Indeed, historically the notion of pop-up stores is decade’s even
centuries old, taking on different formats. The original ones being developed by our
ancestors who moved from producing all their own goods to trading surplus items
concentrating this activity in particular areas, operating from market stalls, which
contributed to the development of market towns (Sullivan 2002). Indeed mobile pop-up
stores have been around for a long time in the form of ice cream and fish and chip vans
(think of Roddy Doyle’s ‘The Van’) even hawkers and pedlars can be defined within the
category of pop-up retailers. In addition, within the last decade there has been a growth
in farmer’s markets, which have served to provide additional outlets for entrepreneurial
small-scale farmers and producers (Bentley et al. 2003). However despite the success
of farmers’ markets, media attention has been focussed on mainstream global or
established brands that have moved into pop-up stores as part of their overall
multichannel retail offering. These companies, such as The Gap, Levis, American
Apparel and Comme des Garcon, communicate locations of pop-ups and timing via the
Internet and mobile technologies using text, email and social networking sites such as
Twitter and Facebook. In addition, they are selling their products, often along with
creating theatrical experiences where ‘spectacle comes first’ (Trendwatching, 2003).
Just as, in the UK, ice cream vans pop up outside school gates evoking excitement and
compelling children through offering them something that is limited, discovery-driven and
of the moment, in today’s retail environment, pop-up stores attempt to evoke the same
excitement.
From a practitioner perspective, in the current economic climate, evidenced in a
downturn in the retail sector (Benigson 2008), pop-up stores present an opportunity for
retailers to stimulate demand for their brand and test the market with new products.
From an academic perspective, internet and mobile technologies have increasingly
attracted the attention of researchers who have explored their affordances and reach
(Boyd & Ellison 2007; Acar & Polonsky 2007; de Souza e Silva 2006; Page 2008) but
limited attention has been paid to the specific employment of these technologies by
retailer who are using SNS and text messaging as part of their marketing
communications strategy. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to explore, with specific
reference to pop-up stores, how retailers are currently using the technologies to create
marketing and brand opportunities. In addition, the paper focuses on fashion retailers as
fashion consumption is understood to involve, for many individuals, a high degree of
social interaction (Kim et al. 2008). Hence examination of fashion adoption through
social diffusion via the internet and mobile technologies will prove to be more fertile than
examination of other retail sectors such as grocery. To sum up, the rationale for
examining the topic under investigation includes:
1. Pop-up stores have had little attention from the retail or marketing academic
community.
2. Fashion consumption and dissemination is of particular interest as it has traditionally
relied on social relationships and word of mouth in respect of new product
developments.
The paper is structured as follows, the first section examines which retailers are
engaging in pop-up stores as part of their multichannel strategy together with what, why,
where and how they are doing it. The second section offers a literature review on viral
marketing by way of exploring how retail brand engagement is facilitated through network
connectivity and web site interactivity. Finally the paper offers conclusions and proposes
areas for future research.
Pop-up Shops: What, why, who, where and how?
Pop up shops, also known as guerrilla stores and retail installations, are evidence
of creative and enterprising methods of marketing communications, which has gone
beyond traditional print and broadcasting mediums (Baker 2008) wherein their primary
aim is to build brand awareness, making sales is a secondary function. In all, as Tran
(2008) points out,
‘it gives people a taste of your product and keep it fresh and always on
people’s minds”.
In addition, pop-up stores may typically offer limited edition brands in order to create a
sense of urgency within the shopper as the offer will not be there forever. For example,
Nike (NKE) opened a pop-up store for four days only with the specific purpose of selling
only 250 pairs of limited edition basketball shoes Gogoi 2007).
Why?
Cost advantages can be accrued by way of pop-up stores as they rely on viral or
word of mouth marketing techniques to put out the message that a temporary store has
been set up. Therefore the retailers do not have to rely on heavy advertising costs
(Baker 2008; Gogoi 2007). Further to this, a pop-up store can be cheaper than a full
shop fit out.
In addition, pop-up stores may be used as a method of brand dissemination
across international markets. For instance, K-Swiss, the American footwear and apparel
retailer, created a pop-up store in Paris as part of their ‘brand activation plan’ in order to
further establish themselves in the French market, as they were not as well recognised
there as in other areas of Europe and the UK (Baker 2008). Similarly, in order to raise its
profile in a new international market, Uniqlo, the Japanese fashion retailer drove two
shipping containers around New York City, giving consumers a clear message that they
were literally coming from Tokyo to New York (Gogoi 2007).
Pop-up stores tap into the current zeitgeist, evidenced through flashmobs Wherein retail
brands are keen to align themselves with aspects of youth culture (Baker 2008). Indeed
in the current uncertain economy, the here today, gone tomorrow nature of pop-up stores
are attractive (Tran 2008). Pop-up stores also tap into the trend of massclusivity
(Trendwatching 2003), wherein exclusive no longer means being expensive. Rather,
appealing to consumers through offering a sense of discovery and buying something that
perhaps no one else may have, that is, ‘the best kept secret in town’ (Benigson 2008).
Further to this, Barr (2008) suggests that ‘pop-ups are the epitome of our high-speed,
short-attention-span culture’. In all, pop-up stores fit into the Entertainment Economy and
the Experience Economy as they are about surprising consumers with temporary
‘performances’ (Trendwatching 2008).
From an economic perspective, the price of retail property is very expensive, as
pointed out by Philip Green, who challenged UK property companies to lower their rents
in order to make way for future creative talents and young businesses. He identified that
property companies not having done this has led to retailing ceasing to offer anything
new (Benigson 2008). As a consequence, in the case of the UK, the national has been
tagged with the name ‘clone town Britain.’ However in such an environment, pop-up
stores present a much needed differentiation in the high street. In addition, they also
present landlords the opportunity to exploit temporary empty stores thereby incurring
‘windfalls’ of income (Commercial Property News 2006). Nevertheless pop-up stores are
not easy to set up. One of the main problems is the reliance on unoccupied stores in
desirable retail locations, which can be difficult to come by.
Who?
Table 1, whilst by no means fully comprehensive, offers a list of fashion retailers
who have developed pop-up stores. Examination of the table indicates that they range
from large international retailers, for example Nike, to designer, for example Any
Hindmarch to cult retailers, for example, PPQ. In terms of market positioning, they range
from discount to luxury. However what is common to all of them is positioning in terms of
age as they all sell to the young adult market.
Insert table 1 here
Where?
Similar to observations made by Doyle et al. (2008), wherein they identified the
establishment of a flagship store provided companies with an opportunity to provide a
context for their brand, this too can be argued for pop-up stores. Both retail formats offer
value in terms of a brand communication achieved through sourcing key fashion
locations. Flagship stores are typically located within fashionable and economically
significant capital cities (Fernie et al. 1998), likewise pop-up stores have followed the
same approach. Hollander (1970) identifies this location strategy as the ‘New York,
Paris, London syndrome.’ As Hollander points out, such cities are targeted in order to
increase the appeal of the fashion retailer’s name. Further to this, neighbourhoods
selected for the location of pop-up stores are also key. For instance, Table 1 lists trendy
locations such as London’s Brick Lane or New York’s Soho area, again with the purpose
of increasing the attraction of the retail brand. Indeed the study by Law et al. (2004)
identified that the perception and receptivity of a new fashion or fashion retail brand can
be judged from the shopping area in which it is located. In all, location as a trend
indicator for a fashion brand.
How?
To date, pop-up stores have taken various formats, either being mobile, in that
they move around to different locations or bricks and mortar in the form of high street
locations. In addition, there have been pop-up stores that are kiosks based within
shopping malls. In all, this form of trading format has the potential to create memorable
experiences for customers (Pine & Gilmore 1999). Obtaining memorable experiences
requires tapping into customer emotions, the customers need for fun and hedonistic
experiences and also understanding the significance of symbolism as part of the
consumer’s consumption process (Addis & Holbrook 2001)
In order to achieve an aim of the paper, this being to explore how retailers have
exploited internet and mobile technologies in order to create marketing and branding
opportunities a theoretical examination needs to be undertaken. This will provide a
greater understanding of the how of pop-up stores and is dealt with in the following
section.
Identification of marketing approaches that facilitate marketing communications
vis a vis pop-up stores
Today’s businesses operate in a competitive landscape that has been
characterised by four over riding forces, these being, change, complexity, chaos and
contradiction (Hitt and Reed 2000). These forces impact upon the retail industry as they
increasingly operate in an environment of increased risk, blurred sector boundaries,
increased channels to market and more demanding customers in terms of wanting
something new. To deal with the changing competitive landscape, a number of
alternative marketing approaches, as identified by Morris et al. (2002) have been
introduced over the past two decades including expeditionary, guerrilla, disruptive,
radical, counterintuitive, buzz, viral and convergence marketing. Each of these vary in
their approach in terms of their tactical versus strategic focus, emphasis on promotion
versus entire marketing mix and focus with regards to small ventures versus established
firms (Morris et al. 2002). However commonalities exist, these being that they offer
creative and alternative approaches for managing marketing and product, process and,
in the case of retailing, format innovation. An umbrella term for these various marketing
approaches is entrepreneurial marketing, which Morris et al. (2002,5) propose is an
integrated construct for conceptualising marketing and define as:
“an opportunistic perspective wherein the marketer proactively seeks novel ways
to create value for desired customers and build customer
equity.”
Guerrilla, viral and buzz marketing are key approaches, which at a tactical level,
have the most applicability to pop-up stores. Guerrilla marketing has been defined as
‘low cost, effective communications, cooperative efforts and networking; leveraging
resources, using energy and imagination” (Levinson 1993). Viral marketing involves
word of mouth communicated via electronic media such as the Internet via its bulletin
boards, chat rooms, email, complaint sites discussion groups and social networking sites
such as Facebook, Youtube and Twitter (Rice 2001). Mason (2008, 207) defines word of
mouth as involving
“activities that are likely to encourage consumers to talk about a
product or company to their friend … setting in motion a chain of
communication that could branch out through a whole community.”
Therefore it is consumers who initiate the dissemination and control to whom
communications are sent. Hence it is the consumer who is empowered to potentially create status
for the brand and can also assist in reducing the need for traditional media advertising. An
additional benefit is that both word of mouth and viral marketing is seen to be more credible than
media advertising because it is seen to be independent of the marketer (Table 2). For instance,
Rice (2001) reports that 80% of brand decisions are influenced by someone other than
the marketer of the brand. However viral marketing compared to traditional word of
mouth marketing is a more focussed medium as consumers will typically communicate
their views on dedicated web sites such as fashion forums. In addition, via the Internet,
their views can reach a wider audience, that is, on a national or global scale (Woerndl et
al. 2008).
Insert Table 2 here
Finally, buzz marketing involves consumer generated information dispersed
through social networks by creating excitement (Rosen 2000). Internet and mobile
technologies are key factors that have led to its use (Morris et al. 2002). To sum up, in
terms of usage of electronic technologies, guerrilla marketing is not dependent on them,
viral marketing is and use of buzz marketing has been encouraged by them. Common
to both viral and buzz marketing is that the consumer does the selling.
Identification of social actors that facilitate marketing communications vis a vis
pop-up stores
Along with salesmen, Gladwell (2000) identifies two other actors who are key in
the social network process, who too facilitate the marketing communication being spread.
The first is ‘mavens’, derived from Yiddish meaning one who accumulates knowledge, or
what Dye (2000) refers to as ‘vanguard consumers’. These are individuals who in a
commercial sense, through personal interest, for example a hobby, are intense gatherers
of product or service information. Secondly, Gladwell (2000) identifies connectors who
will have a large social network of acquaintances drawn from various groupings. The
importance of the role of this actor type has been empirically born out by Woerndl et al.
(2008). In their study, which sought to identify critical success factors for a viral
marketing campaign, they identified that the success of a campaign was derived from the
personal desire for social interaction, as this was important in attracting users’ interest
and speed of dissemination of communication. Gladwell (2000) indicates that an
individual who fits into two or move of the above actor types would be very effective in
enabling viral marketing to occur. This type of individual is what Vargo and Lusch (2004)
refer to as a ‘proactive co-producer.’
In all, viral marketing does not treat consumers as a target wherein something is done to
them, which is how they are treated within traditional marketing concepts (Morris et al. 2002).
Rather, Gladwell (2000) identifies these three types of actors as selected individuals who
contribute to his theory of explaining how social events develop. He considers that there
are few people who could be classified as either salesmen, mavens or connectors,
therefore he refers to them as the ‘law of the few’. Two further laws are identified to
explain the occurrence of social events, these being, firstly the stickiness factor wherein
some aspect of the product or service is so intriguing or eye catching that it will initiate
adoption. For example, Uniqlo’s container vessels sailing down the Hudson river in New
York, which successfully compelled consumers to go and investigate. The final law is the
‘power of context’. This refers to how the idea or message is conveyed. Gladwell (2000)
considers that this has a direct relationship with how well the message is accepted. For
instance, the finite life span of pop-up stores adds to the sense of immediacy and
significance of visiting the retail format. Mason (2008) points out that these three laws
are based upon the concept of chaos theory, which is dependent upon minor changes or
insignificant factors, in this context, the social system, which in turn can have significant
effects on the result of the system.
In addition to Gladwell’s (2000) typology of social actors who are
involved in the social network who take of the role of dissemination of products and
services, Acar and Polonsky’s (2007) examines social actor types in terms of personality
traits. Their study established that individuals use virtual networks in order to
communicate their brand use and opinion leaders, defined as people who are innovative,
technically competent and heavy media users (Rogers 2003), are more likely to openly
communicate about brands. However they spend less time and have a smaller online
social network. Alternatively, opinion seekers, defined as susceptible to interpersonal
influence (Bearden et al. 1989) were more likely to spend more time using SNS such as
Facebook, and in doing so, increasing their social network. Hence whilst opinion seekers
will spend more time networking, opinion leaders will be more likely to offer more
information. Other factors that affected online social network size were gender and
extroversion as females and extroverts were more likely to have larger social networks.
Therefore in terms of proactive co-producers opinion leaders and opinion seekers are not
conducive to contributing to social events such as disseminating information about popup stores. As neither have both a large social network and a large knowledge base,
rather then excel at one or the other. However according to Price (1987) opinion leaders
are more likely to be salesmen as they tend to provide marketplace and shopping
information to others. Yet, as Gladwell (2000) points out, opinion leaders are not
necessarily mavens. For example, someone may be so self absorbed with a specific
hobby that they do not have the time to be salesmen.
Social network sites and fashion dissemination
The use of SNS by individuals interested in fashion is vague. For example,
although no metrics are available, there exists a good number of SNS specifically dealing
with fashion. In particular blogs are popular (albeit incomplete, see Table 3 for examples
of various types of fashion blog sites). However no study exists that has empirically
tested the relationship between blog sites and the commercial success of, for example,
the brands, pop-up stores they identify and discuss.
Undertaken by the researchers, an anecdotal examination of a snap shot of currently
existing fashion blog sites indicate that common characteristics exist. These characteristics
include links to other fashion blog sites, thereby self perpetuating, few commercial links, and
often images of the blogger modeling a recent fashion purchase or self made creation. Often
bloggers will show the purchases that they made and comment upon why they liked them. An
example of this kind of site is garbagedress.blogspot.com.
Fashion consumption is explicit in that, for example, when an individual walks into
a room others will be aware of what that person is wearing. Hence intentional or not,
individuals are by default ‘selling’ fashion (albeit in a positive or negative way!) and
thereby performing the role of one of Gladwell’s (2000) social actors. When fashion
goods are branded, selling is overt, that is, heightened conspicuous consumption (Trigg
2001). Likewise, an individual using a SNS, for example a blog, to discuss a fashion
designer or a favourite retail brand, are also performing the role of a salesman. Indeed
SNS used in this way is confirmed in Acar and Polonsky’s (2007) study of the impact of
opinion leadership and opinion seeking on brand communication. For their findings
suggest that 46% of Facebook users join brand groups or use brands to express
themselves via online platforms. However whilst this finding indicates the willingness to
share brand experiences, it does not identify whether these users were opinion leaders
or opinion seekers.
Users of social network sites use Internet technologies in order to express their
own opinion, help interpret and dissemination information, act as opinion leaders or
simply talk about something they are interested in. However there exists a lack of
research to indicate whether those who talk about brands via SNS, as identified in Acar
and Polonsky’s study, are indeed opinion leaders or opinion seekers. In all, retail
marketers are dependent upon SNS users to dissemination information about the
opening of a pop-up store, yet no empirical research has been established to identify
what role, for example, bloggers, twitters or Facebook users adopt whilst they are using
Internet and mobile technologies. This presents a short fall in our understanding of the
role of SNS for entrepreneurial marketing purposes and is of particular importance in
terms of fashion consumption as traditionally fashion marketers have acknowledged the
important role opinion leaders play in the fashion consumption process (Goldsmith and
Clark 2008).
Conclusion
This paper has synthesised the emerging body of literature on marketing
approaches relevant to pop-up stores. In summary, it raises a number of fundamental
issues. First, pop-up stores have relevance beyond a mere function and direct profit
generation. The second is that these stores provide a context for the retail brand.
Likewise, with regard to the physical pop-up store, the location also serves as a context
as it communicates where the retailer is positioned in the marketplace. Pop-up stores
offer an attractive channel to market for several reasons, it gets around the exorbitant
price or property, albeit on a temporary basis and it offers consumers an innovative,
discovery-driven retail experience.
For the imminent future, retailers face particularly tough marketing conditions.
Therefore gaining an in-depth insight on the dialogues consumers are having via the
Internet and mobile technologies, together with who is having them, in terms of their
personal characteristics and roles that they adopt, will enable marketers to remain
competitive.
Pop-up stores and associated guerrilla, viral and buzz marketing are rich in research
opportunities. Empirical evidence will bring in-depth understanding fostering knowledge
creation relating to alternative retail formats. Future research could involve:
• What makes a source of communication credible?
• Identify characteristics of viral marketing messages that have been successfully diffused in
order to disseminate information regarding pop-up stores.
• Identify personal characteristics or and roles adopted by fashion SNS users
• Relationship between individual characteristics and propensity to disseminate
information.
References
Acar A.S., and Polonsky M. 2007. Online social networks and insights into
marketing communications. Journal of Internet Commerce 6(4):55-72
Addis, M., and Holbrook M. 2001. On the conceptual link between mass
customisation and experiential consumption: An explosion of
subjectivity. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 1(1):50-66.
Baker R. 2008. In store marketing. p.35-39
Barr D. 2008. The pop-up shop phenomenon. The Sunday Times, December
28th 2008
Bearden W., Richard G., Netemeyer J., & Teel E. 1989. Measurement of
consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of
Consumer Research, 15(4):473-481
Benigson M., 2008. Pop up shops are a high street treat. Drapers Online, 12th
December 2008,
[http://www.drapersonline.com/blogs/fashion_blogs/2008/12/blog_pop_
upshops_are_a_high_street_treat.html] downloaded 26th January 2009
Bentley G., Hallsworth A.G., and Bryan A., 2003. The countryside in the city –
situating a farmers’ market in Birmingham, Local Economy, 18(2):109120
Commerical Property News 2006. Pop goes the retailer, Commercial Property
News, 1st July 2006, http://www.allbusiness.com/operations/facilitiescommercial-real-estate/4424015-1.html
Doyle S., Moore C.M., Doherty A.M., and Hamilton M., 2008. Brand context and control:
the role of the flagship store in B&B Italia, International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management, 36(7):551-563
Dye R. 2000. The buzz on the buzz’, Harvard Business Review, 78(6):139-46
Fernie J. Moore C.M. and Lawrie A. 1998. A tale of two cities: an examination of fashion
designer retailers within London and New York. Journal of
Product and Brand Management, 7(5):366-378
Gogoi P. 2007. Pop-up stores: all the rage, Business Week, February 9th 2007,
Guthrie J. Guthrie A. Lawson R. & Cameron A. 2006. Farmer’s markets: the small
business counter-revolution in food production and retailing, British Food Journal,
108(7): 560-573
Hitt M.A. & Reed T.S. 2000. Entrepreneurship in the new competitive landscape. p.23-47
in G.D. Meyer & Heppard K.A. (eds) ‘Entrepreneurship as Strategy’, Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Hollander, S.C. 1970. Multinational Retailin’, Michigan State University, MI.,
Gladwell M. 2000 The tipping point: how little things can make a big difference, London:
Abacus
Goldsmith R.E. & Clark R.A. 2008. An analysis of factors affecting fashion opinion
leadership and fashion opinion seeking. Journal of Fashion Marketing Management
12(3); 308-322
Jurvetson S. 2000 Turning customers into a sales force, Business 2.0, March
p.27-31
Kim H. Rhee E.Y. & Yee J. 2008. Comparing fashion process networks and friendship
networks in small groups of adolescents, Journal of Fashion Marketing
Management’, 12(4): 545 – 564
Law K.M. Zhang Z.M. & Leugn C.S. 2004. Fashion change and fashion consumption:
the chaotic perspective, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 8(4):362374
Levinson C. 1993. Guerrilla marketing: secrets for making big profits from your small
business Boston:Houghton Mifflin Company
Mason R.B. 2008. Word of mouth as a promotional tool for turbulent markets, Journal of
Marketing Communications 14(3):207-224
Morris M.H. Schindehutte M. LaForge R.W. 2002. Entrepreneurial marketing: a construct
for integrating emerging entrepreneurship and marketing perspectives, Journal of
Marketing, Fall:1-18
Page K. 2008. Facebook: a new chapter in social connectivity, chapter 18 in P.
Baines C.Fill & K.Page Marketing; Oxford University Press:United Kingdom
Pine II, B.J. & Gilmore, J.H. 1999. The experience economy,
Price L.L. Feick L.F. & Coulter R.H. 1987. Information sensitive consumers
and market information’, Journal of Consumer Affairs, 21(2):328-341
Rice A. 2001. Once upon a time in Iowa, USA, p.65-68 in. The encyclopaedia of brands
and branding in South Africa, Johannesburg: Sunday Times
Rogers E.M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition New York: Free Press
Sullivan M. 2002. Retail Marketing, Thomson Learning
Tran T.L. 2008. Creative concepts popping uo at retail Women’s Wear Daily,
10th January 2008, 196(71)
Trendwatching 2003. pop up retail. Trendwatching
[http://trendwatching.com/trends/POPUP_RETAIL.htm], downloaded
27th January 2009
Trigg A. B. 2001. Veblen, Bourdieu and conspicuous consumption, Journal of
Economic Issues, 35(1), pp. 99–115.
Vargo S.L. & Lusch R.F. 2004. Evolving to a new dominant logic for
marketing, Journal of Marketing, 68:1-17
Woerndl M. Papagiannidis S. Bourlakis M. & Li F. 2008. Internet-induced
marketing techniques: critical success factors in viral marketing
campaigns, International Journal of Business Science and Applied
Management 3(1):33-45
Table I
Examples of Fashion retailers engaging in pop-up stores
|RETAILER
|Store Format |Length of
|location
|Year
|
|
|opening
|
|
|American
|Physical
|45 days
|New York
|
|Apparel
|
|
|
|
|Target,
|Physical &
|5 weeks
|New York, Lower |2003
|discount
|Mobile/floatin|
|Manhattan
|2004
|fashion
|g on the
|
|
|
|franchise
|Hudson river, |
|
|
|
|New York
|
|
|
|Comme des
|Physical
|1 year
|Berlin, Germany |2004
|Garcon,
|
|
|Los Angeles
|
|designer brand |
|
|Singapore
|
|
|
|
|Glasgow
|
|JC Penney
|Physical
|n/k
|New York
|2004
|Bluefly.com,
|Physical
|
|New York
|
|online US
|
|
|
|
|fashion
|
|
|
|
|retailer
|
|
|
|
|Nike (NKE)
|Physical
|4 days
|New York, Soho
|
|The Gap (GPS) |Mobile/School |n/k
|Los Angeles
|2007
|
|bus
|
|New York
|
|Wal-Mart (WMT),|Physical
|2 days
|Miami
|2007
|fashion line
|
|
|
|
|Metro 7
|
|
|
|
|Uniqlo
|Mobile/2
|2 months
|New York,
|2007
|
|shipping
|
|Brooklyn
|
|
|containers
|
|
|
|
|
|2 -18 May
|
|2008
|
|
|
|London, Brick
|
|
|
|
|Lane
|
|K-Swiss
|Physical
|3 weeks
|Paris, Citadium |2008
|
|within a store|
|
|
|Vintage
|Physical
|2 months
|London
|2008
|Emporium
|
|
|
|
|Barnado’s
|Physical
|4 weeks
|London
|2009
|Vintage Store |
|
|
|
|The Jackdaw
|Physical
|During
|London,
|2009
|Store selling |
|February’s |Burlington Arcade|
|PPQ
|
|London
|
|
|
|
|Fashion Week|
|
|Primrose Bakery|Physical store|22-27
|London
|2008
|at Anya
|within a store|September to|
|
|Hindmarch
|
|coincide
|
|
|
|
|with
|
|
|
|
|Hindmarch’s |
|
|
|
|new
|
|
|
|
|collection |
|
|Scarlet &
|Physical store|15 - 18
|
|2008
|Violet florist |within a store|October
|
|
|at Anya
|
|
|
|
|Hindmarch
|
|
|
|
|Kangol
|Physical store|n/k
|London,
|2008
|
|
|
|Nottinghill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|Camper
|Physical
|
|
|Samaritans
|Physical
|Nowhere,
|Physical
|collaboration |within a
|between A
|
|Bathing Ape and|
|Undercover
|
store|n/k
|
store|n/k
store|n/k
store|
|
|
|
|London, Brick
|Lane
|London, Fulham
|London, basement
|of Dover Street
|Market
|
|
|2008
|
|2008
|2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 2:
Potential Benefits and Drawbacks of Viral Marketing
(adapted from Woerndl et al., 2008)
|Category
|Benefit
|Drawback
|
|Financial
|Inexpensive compared |
|
|
|to traditional
|
|
|
|advertising
|
|
|Speed of diffusion|Faster than word of
|Dependent upon when
|
|
|mouth
|the sender chooses to |
|
|
|post email message on |
|
|
|discussion board etc. |
|Communication
|Voluntary
|Consumer dependency: |
|
|communication from the|possible negative word|
|
|sender
|of mouth
|
|Audience reach
|More effective
|Control of reach is
|
|
|targeting
|within the hands of
|
|
|
|the sender
|
Table 3
A Selection of Fashion Social Network Sites
|http://disneyrollergirl.blogspot.com/
|Blog site
|http://www.stylebubble.co.uk/
|Blog site
|http://into-thefray.com/blog/
|Online retailer with
|http://www.ashadedviewonfashion.com/
|blogspot
|http://anniespandex.com/
|Blog site
|http://ilovecatparty.blogspot.com/
|Online retailer with
|http://garbagedress.blogspot.com/
|blogspot
|http://is-mental.blogspot.com/
|Blog site
|http://jakandjil.com/blog/
|Blog site
|http://kingdomofstyle.typepad.co.uk/
|Blog site
|http://professionally-trendy.blogspot.com|Blog site
|/
|Blog site
|http://www.randomfashioncoolness.com/blog|Blog site
|/
|Blog site
|http://stylesalvage.blogspot.com/
|Blog site
|http://doylesays.blogspot.com/
|Blog site with commercial
|http://sarahrabia.blogspot.com
|links
|http://childhoodflames.blogspot.com/
|Blog site
|
|Blog site
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|